These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[March] Rorqual and Mining changes

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Algarion Getz
Aideron Corp
#321 - 2017-02-24 10:03:11 UTC
Oh boy. A thread full of Goon and PL members crying about mining nerfs. What a time to be alive.

A few years ago this would have been unthinkable.
Aleverette
Bag ol' Dciks
#322 - 2017-02-24 10:04:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Aleverette
Amphal Deka wrote:
I'm still not happy with the costs of the Excavator Drones. They cost more then the rorqual it's self! I be better off with t3 battle ship doing sites with no risk really. Excavator Drones need to be place in the LP store and nerf the t2 drone parts off it. Let's get the cost down to around of a hulk fitted up. Not letting the darn Excavator Drones be worth 1.7 which is very unhealthy for the market. Anyone at this point can drive cost up or control them.


You should know half of the manufacture price comes from Drone Coronary Units, which drop from elite Rogue Drones.
Virke Arjar
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#323 - 2017-02-24 10:09:54 UTC
Meanwhile Excavator Drones cost sits strong at 1.4 bil each.

LMAO
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#324 - 2017-02-24 10:13:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Grath Telkin
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hello again folks. Got another set of changes today for your feedback.

These changes revolve around the Rorqual and mining in general. We've been keeping a close eye on the mineral economy since Ascension and we feel that we need to make another fairly significant intervention in order to help keep this area of the EVE economy healthy.

At the same time we're preparing some other changes related to mining that have more to do with QoL and module balance.

Here's the package of somewhat related changes we have in mind at the moment:

Excavator Drones:
We're planning another reduction in Excavator drone yield to help keep the mineral economy healthy. I know it never feels good when things get nerfed but we're very confident that the Rorqual will continue to be an extremely powerful mining ship after these changes (not to mention the value provided by its other functions such as foreman links and defenses). We plan on continuing to make changes in this area as necessary over the coming months with the goal of keeping the mineral market healthy and ensuring that a wide variety of mining ships are viable.
[list]
  • Speed up the cycle time of 'Excavator' ore mining drones to 60 seconds, and reduce the yield per cycle to 110 m3 base. This will reduce the idealized yield per minute, increase the number of trips required to and from the asteroid, but also reduce the amount of wasted cycle at the end of an asteroid's life.



    • Why, who exactly thinks this is a problem?

    Its not the players so who is it?

    You've achieved the ability to largely force localized production while at the same time putting ships in space that people are actually fighting over and you want to change that why exactly?


    Your stated reason is trash tier, stop talking like we're dumb. The mineral basket was bound to collapse as long as jump freighters remained un nerfed so now that you've proven that you can support localized production why are you going all chickenshit on us?

    What on earth makes you think its ok to make a ship cost so much and do so little in return and why do you think its ok to do that after you baited so much of your player base into buying into it?

    It will literally mine like 2 hulks. Are you serious?

    EDIT: You're screwing up parts of the game that are functionally working while ignoring things like citadels granting a tether with no fuel so it that space is now grotesquely littered with these perma safe dumpster fires. Thanks for wasting everybodies time.

    Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
    Mephiztopheleze
    Laphroaig Inc.
    #325 - 2017-02-24 10:15:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Mephiztopheleze
    These are some appallingly badly thought out changes.

    The combination of quicker cycles and spread out belts will nerf Rorq mining yield into the ground as drones will need to cover more distance thanks to needing to make more trips. If you're determined to do this, can you also reduce the cycle time of the Industrial Core? Say, drop it to 3 minutes for T1 and 90s for T2? The T2 Core is a VERY long train. Another option would be that the Inductrial Core will disallow warping while active, but not regular sub-warp movement?

    I understand wanting to kill off the indestructible Jump HIC aspect (which, to be fair, is somewhat ridiculous as things stand), so why not simply remove the Rorqs ability to activate tackle modules while in PANIC?

    If you're determined to make Rorquals no better than an Exhumer, can you give us something in return for the ~ISK1b worth of Skillbooks and non-trivial training time required to fly one? Allowing the Ship Maintenance Bay to carry any kind of ship would be useful (perhaps any kind of ship except a HIC or Interdictor?)

    We're talking about an ISK11b ship once fit and kitted out with Excavator Drones. It should damn well perform like one.


    Edit: if a Rorqual can only mine as much as two Hulks, why on earth would I ever use one? I'd be better off selling my Rorqual, stripping out the skills and buying two Hulk pilots + ships. I daresay I'll have a considerable amount of change and instead of putting ISK11b on the line every time I undock, I'm risking around ISK500m for the same yield.

    Occasional Resident Newbie Correspondent for TMC: http://themittani.com/search/site/mephiztopheleze

    This is my Forum Main. My Combat Alt is sambo Inkura
    Pesadel0
    Sebiestor Tribe
    Minmatar Republic
    #326 - 2017-02-24 10:34:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Pesadel0
    Grath Telkin wrote:
    CCP Fozzie wrote:
    Hello again folks. Got another set of changes today for your feedback.

    These changes revolve around the Rorqual and mining in general. We've been keeping a close eye on the mineral economy since Ascension and we feel that we need to make another fairly significant intervention in order to help keep this area of the EVE economy healthy.

    At the same time we're preparing some other changes related to mining that have more to do with QoL and module balance.

    Here's the package of somewhat related changes we have in mind at the moment:

    Excavator Drones:
    We're planning another reduction in Excavator drone yield to help keep the mineral economy healthy. I know it never feels good when things get nerfed but we're very confident that the Rorqual will continue to be an extremely powerful mining ship after these changes (not to mention the value provided by its other functions such as foreman links and defenses). We plan on continuing to make changes in this area as necessary over the coming months with the goal of keeping the mineral market healthy and ensuring that a wide variety of mining ships are viable.
    [list]
  • Speed up the cycle time of 'Excavator' ore mining drones to 60 seconds, and reduce the yield per cycle to 110 m3 base. This will reduce the idealized yield per minute, increase the number of trips required to and from the asteroid, but also reduce the amount of wasted cycle at the end of an asteroid's life.



    • Why, who exactly thinks this is a problem?

    Its not the players so who is it?

    You've achieved the ability to largely force localized production while at the same time putting ships in space that people are actually fighting over and you want to change that why exactly?


    Your stated reason is trash tier, stop talking like we're dumb. The mineral basket was bound to collapse as long as jump freighters remained un nerfed so now that you've proven that you can support localized production why are you going all chickenshit on us?

    What on earth makes you think its ok to make a ship cost so much and do so little in return and why do you think its ok to do that after you baited so much of your player base into buying into it?

    It will literally mine like 2 hulks. Are you serious?

    EDIT: You're screwing up parts of the game that are functionally working while ignoring things like citadels granting a tether with no fuel so it that space is now grotesquely littered with these perma safe dumpster fires. Thanks for wasting everybodies time.


    I have to agree with Grath here , i mean the mineral crash was long overdue (maybe i dont have access to your data?_) and the rourqual mining brougth more content in the terms of isk destroyed in the time it got live, so my question fozie is why should my alliance bring 3 rourquals to mine and risk a 11B ship when i can bring 2 Hulks?
    Drago Shouna
    Doomheim
    #327 - 2017-02-24 10:51:21 UTC
    Silly question, but why not just reduce the drone bandwidth on the Rorq for awhile?

    Put it down to 4 or even 3 fielded and watch the mineral market.

    As for the roid idea, I give in...but at least it will probably lead to some vigorous discussions at Fanfest What?

    Solecist Project...." They refuse to play by the rules and laws of the game and use it as excuse ..." " They don't care about how you play as long as they get to play how they want."

    Welcome to EVE.
    svobouch bouchovci
    Republic Military School
    Minmatar Republic
    #328 - 2017-02-24 11:18:36 UTC
    fousie....a good news bringer....
    Hurri Nakrar
    Imperial Shipment
    Amarr Empire
    #329 - 2017-02-24 11:30:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Hurri Nakrar
    Fozzy just a serious question.

    Why are you ALWAYS working against the whole community and still think you make this game better for anyone? There is so much critic against all these Changes and we all know it will still keep coming but it will still hurt the entire game World. Why should anyone of us still be motivated if you give us nice features and take them away @ the first moment you can.
    Dip PotatoChip
    Bag ol' Dciks
    #330 - 2017-02-24 11:36:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Dip PotatoChip
    Give it like a God
    Take it away like a Boss
    Leave it for Fanfest and wait for applause.
    Great job balance team.
    Trevize Demerzel
    #331 - 2017-02-24 11:58:43 UTC
    Oddly... The times I've seen a Rorq used as an attack ship have been in a mining belt with the purpose of locking down other rorqs. So now that attacking Rorq can target a rock and still do the same thing.... Nothing fixed by this nerf... so please try again..

    I'll echo the fine folks above. With the changes to the Exav drones it is no longer worth the risk for the reward. It simply costs too much. It becomes more effective to go back to hulk/can mining.

    I also don't believe the issue is cost of ore in the market. I think the real issue is about the number of supers, titans, and caps in general that are being built at a highly accelerated rate. Nullsec cap manufacturing doesn't need to import ore from jita nearly as much as it used to (if at all) and therefore the price has dropped. I don't think much ore is being shipped from null to jita.

    -
    FT Diomedes
    The Graduates
    #332 - 2017-02-24 12:26:52 UTC
    Oberon Altair wrote:
    What's the point of a 10 billion + investment for a ship and even more for a character if you can make the same amount now in a carrier which can be nearly fully insured and 1/5th of the cost or AGAIN NEARLY RUNNING INCURSIONS THE SAFEST THING IN THE ENTIRE GAME.

    Stop making changes to things that require people to actually have some risk as a side to their isk making.


    You missed the part where they also nerfed Carrier ratting.

    CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

    Destriouth Hollow
    Star-Destroying-Warlords
    #333 - 2017-02-24 13:03:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Destriouth Hollow
    I am pretty certain, the mining yield of the rorqual is not the problem here.
    And you will need some more nerfs if you want to balance it by that ^^

    The problem isnt that a 10bil ship nets you 200mil an hour.
    Supercarriers can do something similar already.

    Incursions also can give you similar income.

    The problem is, that compared to the other high-end isk/hour incomes in eve, rorqual mining can be done semi afk and multiboxed. Nullsec roids are big enough so they dont need to switch asteroids a lot. And aside from that, nothing prevents anyone from using 20 rorqs at the same time., in secured nullsec space with defense fleet ready.
    That and ppl can do rorqual mining while they do other stuff, like pvping, pveing etc

    I am 99% sure the afk and multiboxable nature of rorqual mining is the problem here.

    A working fix would be, having to unload the mining drones each time they come back or something similar.
    That would be the much smarter way to do it, in my opinion.
    Or maybe only allow a single sieged rorqual on grid.

    Currently rorqual mining has the following 3 characteristics:
    1. multiboxable
    2. safe in huge pvp-alliances
    3. income greater than any other activity, that has 1. and 2. fullfilled

    One of these 3 needs to change. safety will be hard to touch. Income would have to be nerfed into the ground for all regular users aswell. So 1. is the way to go! nerf multiboxing rorquals.
    Marcus Tedric
    Zebra Corp
    Goonswarm Federation
    #334 - 2017-02-24 13:13:19 UTC
    All Rorqual Miners are forgetting that some ~80% of all mining accounts are in HS.....

    The PANIC change seems cack-handed - a much simpler and more elegant way would be better (PANIC = No Targets, for example).

    The drone mining reduction is probably about right.

    Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
    TeflonMag Usoko
    Native Freshfood
    Minmatar Republic
    #335 - 2017-02-24 13:16:30 UTC
    WHY DON'T YOU JUST DELETE CAPITALS???

    You make fighters sitting ducks and rorqs a couple of very expensive mining barges.

    This is a lack of respect towards players engaged in end-game content.

    Also, its making the good paying players and the content creators flee.

    Sorry CCP but you just made capital investment alot less attractive.

    Simple minded people will always find simple solutions that will only solve their problems not group's problems.

    CCP you are supposed to be there to solve OUR problems, not yours.
    Amarisen Gream
    The.Kin.of.Jupiter
    #336 - 2017-02-24 13:20:09 UTC
    Dear CCP,

    I just want to say this:

    IMO the mineral market needs to continue to tank. You need to roll back the previous changes to some extent on the Rorqual and look at other ways of balancing out the mineral market with the influx of minerals.

    Trit has a base value of 2 ISK. Inflation is what has risen the price from 2 ISK to 3.5-5.5 ISK p/u.

    I am probably going to echo others - the Rorqual isn't the issue. We currently have to many good ISK faucets and not any decent sinks. This also applies to the number of belts.

    ---
    I am looking at and reading Destriouth Hollows post before mine, and got me thinking. You might need to make changes to the mining index systems to make it harder to get the bigger belts. Personally I wish that CCP would remove the TCU mining anoms and instead have it somehow upgrade the belts in system, and then move to a weekly renewing system. With different areas of space having different days of the week in which they renew their belts. Instead of the current system where they re spawn after 3 days or next DT if depleted.

    Idea for weekly respawn would be
    Monday - Amarr
    Tuesday - Gallente
    Wednesday - Null/WH
    Thus - Minnie
    Friday - Caldari

    "The Lord loosed upon them his fierce anger All of his fury and rage. He dispatched against them a band of Avenging Angels" - The Scriptures, Book II, Apocalypse 10:1

    #NPCLivesMatter #Freetheboobs
    Destriouth Hollow
    Star-Destroying-Warlords
    #337 - 2017-02-24 13:43:27 UTC
    @Amarisen Gream
    Sadly multiboxed rorquals will always be able to keep mining level at 5. If not, no other fleet could do it anymore (:
    Pesadel0
    Sebiestor Tribe
    Minmatar Republic
    #338 - 2017-02-24 14:23:02 UTC
    Destriouth Hollow wrote:
    I am pretty certain, the mining yield of the rorqual is not the problem here.
    And you will need some more nerfs if you want to balance it by that ^^

    The problem isnt that a 10bil ship nets you 200mil an hour.
    Supercarriers can do something similar already.

    Incursions also can give you similar income.

    The problem is, that compared to the other high-end isk/hour incomes in eve, rorqual mining can be done semi afk and multiboxed. Nullsec roids are big enough so they dont need to switch asteroids a lot. And aside from that, nothing prevents anyone from using 20 rorqs at the same time., in secured nullsec space with defense fleet ready.
    That and ppl can do rorqual mining while they do other stuff, like pvping, pveing etc

    I am 99% sure the afk and multiboxable nature of rorqual mining is the problem here.

    A working fix would be, having to unload the mining drones each time they come back or something similar.
    That would be the much smarter way to do it, in my opinion.
    Or maybe only allow a single sieged rorqual on grid.

    Currently rorqual mining has the following 3 characteristics:
    1. multiboxable
    2. safe in huge pvp-alliances
    3. income greater than any other activity, that has 1. and 2. fullfilled

    One of these 3 needs to change. safety will be hard to touch. Income would have to be nerfed into the ground for all regular users aswell. So 1. is the way to go! nerf multiboxing rorquals.



    So you want to nerf rourqual multiboxavle? You know what miners will do?

    1- Sell the rourquals
    2-Buy a super
    3-Rat in the umbrella of the multilateral protection of a big alliance

    Everything in PVE eve is done semi-afaik you know why? Because it sucks , just look the last time CCP did a pass on PVE in EVE was when?If you dont have a healthy population of PVers you wont have as much PVP content and that is a fact.I dont see this change doing anything good to the game and i think there is bigger problems eve need's to tackle first and foremost like Null sov ,moonmining,citadels,PVE in general .

    And buy the way everyone said when the new bonus of the rourqual were proposed that the panic module would create battle rourquals just go and check the discussions from that time , everyone liked to see rourquals in belts you know mining not hugging a pos field and taking the bonus to mining and dont giving nothing back will just put rourquals again mining at the belt with hulks , who in there rigth mids (besides goons) will put more than 1 rourqual at a belt?
    Mariko Musashi Hareka
    Kaishin.
    #339 - 2017-02-24 14:23:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Mariko Musashi Hareka
    CCP Lebowski wrote:
    Tribal Trogdor wrote:
    Quote:
    Initial activation of the PANIC module would require the Rorqual to have an active target lock on an asteroid.
    So...if you go in and jam a rorq before he panics, he cant panic? that sounds like a pretty bad fix to the problem here
    I mean he can panic, just not PANIC Blink


    Well this is bullshit honestly this isnt a fix but a big F YOU to miners, if yall are so worried about entosis use and tackle why not just make it so where the rorqual cant use those? Really stupid to make it so where you have to have an asteroid locked in order to use it. So does this mean when I clear an asteroid belt and someone comes in and and tackles my rorqual and I end up losing it do to this bullshit change youre going to replace it due to stupid mechanics that you made?

    Also on the excavator changes seriously wtf? Ok then you NEED TO DO SOMETHING about their prices they are still way overpriced from the last nerf and now youre lowering it again and ye the price of them is not going to change and now with you lowering it again getting a return on our investment will now take even longer.
    Mr Bignose
    Pandemic Horde Inc.
    Pandemic Horde
    #340 - 2017-02-24 14:24:02 UTC
    Destriouth Hollow wrote:
    @Amarisen Gream
    Sadly multiboxed rorquals will always be able to keep mining level at 5. If not, no other fleet could do it anymore (:


    It's pretty easy to keep at least one system at level 5 with subcaps. the bigger issue is perpetually rolling colossal anoms and the excess of trit, pyrerite etc that this produces. We want local ore production going into cap production in our shiny new azbels, not jump-freighters destined for jita 4-4.

    This nerf doesn't address that as it simultaneously removes the mineral sink with the excess. ie. line members going out and losing caps weekly because they could afford to by mining. it won't stop the multiboxers though, they will continue to grow their fleets and flood high sec.